QPR1st Supporters’ Trust notes that the Daily Telegraph has named QPR in a top ten of badly run clubs. This can’t be a surprise as it is based on the extraordinary £135 million plus debt built up by the club in recent years. We have raised this issue and have made our view clear – that over-spending on this scale could put the future of our club at risk.

We hope change has come. The Daily Telegraph article does not reflect what appears to be a change in transfer policy based on dealings in the current window so far; with more emphasis on bringing in up and coming players rather than hugely expensive big names. Also, the cub has appointed a chief executive with a track record of financial competence in football. Our hope is that the club is entering a new phase, and our first meeting with the new chief executive, Lee Hoos, gives us room for optimism. We trust that a major part of improved management will be more openness, consultation and the involvement of supporters in decision-making, and we look forward to supporting the club in achieving this.

Our sympathy goes to supporters of the club identified as the worst run in the country – Blackpool.

This was primarily intended as a ‘get to know you’ meeting with Lee speaking about his previous career in football as well as seeking to find out from us our thoughts and feelings as QPR fans. Lee emphasised that he was keen to consult with fans and expressed many positive sentiments which we found very encouraging.

The Supporters Trust presented Lee with the list of requests which were recently published on our website and he promised to give them his due attention. The LSA representatives also discussed issues of concern.

We hope that this meeting marks the start of a constructive dialogue between our new CEO and the Supporters Trust

QPR1st Supporters’ Trust believes that if something positive is to come out of relegation then the opportunity should be taken not only to rebuild the playing squad, but also to restore the covenant between the club and the fans; rebuilding QPR as a club that is part of the community.

Given his background and track record, the appointment of Lee Hoos seems to be a step in the direction and in the tradition of the Supporters’ Trust we will seek to work closely with the new chief executive in a mood of co-operation and partnership.

Throughout this season we will be campaigning on the following aims and are looking forward to your support and suggestions. Please email us on info@qpr1st.com.

Our requests

The club will genuinely consult and involve supporters in decision-making. Consultation does not mean a just quick and dirty online survey, or tweeting – it means actually talking to and listening to supporters and supporter organisations, and reporting back on action taken as a result. Our suggestions are:

A minimum of three scheduled meetings between representatives of the club, including the chief executive, and representatives of QPR1st and the LSA to discuss issues of organisation and management at the club.

At least one Fans’ Forum with the chief executive in attendance but with consideration of how this event could be better organised and more inclusive.

The creation of a fans’ focus group or groups as a sounding board to obtain opinion and influence decision-making about a range of issues to improve the match-day experience and on issues listed below.

Continued liaison between the media team and fans led media bodies such as AKUTRs, the QPR Podcast and large internet based fans discussion groups.

A clear commitment to obtaining the views and opinions of a wide spectrum of disabled fans in particular in relationship to how the new stadium could be an exemplary model of inclusion beyond just meeting legal requirements.

Genuine consultation and involvement of supporters in decision-making on:

The proposed new stadium; building layout, design, facilities and also involvement in the ongoing management of the stadium – important if it is not directly owned by the football club.

The badge, and kit design – including a restoration of the traditional hoops. Discussion of the badge should be more than an online vote on worked up designs.

Ticket prices for 2016/17.

Any significant changes proposed to the current stadium arrangements – on the family area, for example.

More affordable mascot and kit sponsorship packages; for example by reintroducing the option to sponsor part of the kit at a cheaper rate. A national paper “exposed” that charges to be a QPR mascot were the highest in the Premier League last season. This needs to be looked at, as do junior season ticket prices – again among the most expensive.

Restoration of the traditional Player of the Year event as an opportunity for staff, players and fans to come together to celebrate the season.

Family days – this has been successful over the last years. Supporters may have ideas for making them even better.

QPR1st will also continue to press the club to pay all staff at least the Living Wage – currently £9.15 in London, and ensure contractors are similarly paid. We raised the issue with Premier League staff in February, and were pleased when PL clubs later agreed to pay directly employed staff from the 2016/17 season. We hope the club will keep to that pledge and also make sure subcontractors pay staff the Living Wage, as set out by the Living Wage Foundation. QPR1st regrets the fact that it is Chelsea and not QPR that has won praise for adopting the Living Wage for staff and contractors.

We have asked for a meeting with Mr Hoos. The club needs to build a new, more open, and trusting relationship with its supporters. We look forward to meeting Mr Hoos and discussing how we and the club can take this forward.

Congratulations to Hull City supporters on their successful campaign to stop the club owners from changing the name of the football club. Well done to the Football Association Council for listening to supporter views and for respecting tradition; by rejecting, for a second time, the proposal to change the club name.

It is shocking that club owner Assem Allam has reportedly threatened to sell the club should he not get his way. Football clubs have history and are important to communities. A club’s name is an important part of its identity. Changes to a name should not be made without support from that community.

Car Giant’s programme of public presentations on their plans for Old Oak are underway – and they are promising a further wave of public exhibitions and consultation in September and October.

That’s before they submit their application for outline planning permission in December. They say there will be further consultation in early 2016.

Their current presentation contains a seemingly sarcastic reference to QPR’s bid to build on the site.

They say “With a regeneration area of over 170 acres there are several more appropriate sites which could host a future stadium and we wish QPR well in being able to identify a site which it is actually able to deliver.”

The claim that QPR can’t deliver on Old Oak is definitely giving the club an aggressive poke in the eye.

The remaining parts of the regeneration area they refer to are in Park Royal. It would be good to hear from the club if this is a realistic option.

Car Giant’s own proposals for the area look good but are very short on detail. They have a cultural area but no information on what would be in it, and they claim they will create an exceptional place; but it is hard to see anything exceptional about it.

However, they are pushing ahead and have given a timescale for their next steps. QPR1st Supporters’ Trust would like the club to follow their example and share their latest ideas.

Car Giant gave reasons for not including a stadium at Old Oak;

“The overriding need at Old Oak common is for homes, jobs and community facilities for local people, especially on land which is so close to the transport infrastructure. As the first major site to come forward, it is also vital that we create the critical mass that forms the new neighbourhood.

“A stadium on our land would take up huge space, significantly reduce the number of homes, jobs and community benefits that could be delivered and all for a use which would lie largely dormant for the vast majority of the year. We own and control our entire 46-acre site and believe that would be quite wrong here.”

No decision on planning applications is expected until well into next year.

Our thoughts are with Stan Bowles and his family following the announcement that he has developed a form of Alzheimer’s.

Stan is one of few QPR players who are only referred to by their first name, such is the love and respect he is held in at Loftus Road.

We welcome reports that the club is in contact with Stan’s family and offering support, and understand that more information on how we can best help in these difficult circumstances will be available in due course.

Car Giant has received a wave of positive publicity for its proposals for Old Oak in local and Londonwide newspapers, on TV news and in specialist building publications. This has included positive responses from those who will make the planning decisions for Old Oak.

At the same time, the club has been silent on its proposal for a stadium at Old Oak and has not published a meaningful update since November last year.

The TV news coverage reported that QPR turned down a request to be interviewed for the story. The club did not even provide a statement and so the positive coverage for the Car Giant bid was undiluted.

The club website does not record positive publicity in the media for the QPR proposal since September 2014.

We believe that the club should break the silence and share with supporters real information on the latest proposals and options for a new stadium.

We are asking for a meeting with the club’s chief operating officer Mark Donnelly to discuss these issues.

Some of the publicity for the Car Giant scheme includes apparently supportive comments from the local council leader and from the chair of the Old Oak and Park Royal Development Corporation, which will decide who will develop Old Oak.

In January, the club welcomed the comments by Sir Edward Lister, who is now chair of the Development Corporation. A club statement reported that Lister said that the “Old Oak regeneration should be stadium-led – ‘we would like to see one (a stadium)’.” The club described this as “a significant boost to the club’s hopes of building a new stadium near Loftus Road”.

This week, Lister said on BBC London News; “Do I think a stadium is essential to a redevelopment – no”.

He also said: “I think there is scope within the Old Oak Common area for QPR to find a suitable site. I think that is perfectly possible and I am sure it will happen over the course of time”. He seemed to be referring to parts of Old Oak where the land is not owned by Car Giant.

We would like to know the club response to this comment and what it means for the stadium proposal.

As we reported earlier this month, more than 3,000 QPR supporters answered the call from the club to send in messages of support for the stadium to the Development Corporation. It is time the club treated supporters as intelligent partners and shared its proposals with us.

The appointment of a co-chair, Ruben Gnanalingam alongside Tony Fernandes means another change at the top at QPR.

With the appointment of a new chief executive, Lee Hoos, and co-chairman arrangements, there are big changes off the pitch, while the director of football and new chief coach appointments lead change on the pitch.

Ruben Gnanalingam is not new to the club. With Tony Fernandes and Kamrudin Meranun, he controls just over 66 per cent of shares in QPR. Since the new stadium has been proposed, the three are the sole shareholders of Rangers Development Ltd and its subsidiary, Rangers Stadium Development Ltd.

We hope the new arrangements will bring success to the club and look forward to meeting the chief executive and chairmen.

Car Giant are next week holding a number of meetings to update some influential people; politicians, community organisations and others, about their latest thinking on their proposals for Old Oak. They will also be telling them about their upcoming programme of public consultation.

Car Giant and QPR are developing rival plans for the redevelopment of Old Oak.

Some of those Car Giant meetings will involve their partners, including London and Regional Properties, a company that claims to have 9bn-worth of developments underway in projects from Park Royal to Panama.

QPR seems to have been less pro-active. We met Hammersmith MP Andy Slaughter to discuss the stadium and other QPR issues this week – and although he has been invited to one of the Car Giant events, he has not been updated by QPR.

He did sign the pre-election pledge supporting the club’s proposal to keep the club in Hammersmith – but, like us, has not had an update on the club’s plans for some time.

This emphasises the urgent need for the club to share information with supporters and supporter organisations so we can play our part in influencing the outcome of decision-making around the new stadium and Old Oak.

Car Giant will be holding seven public consultation meetings from 18 June to 4 July.